Consumer Reports survey on Customer Service

I choose Sprint because it works for ME wherever i've ever wanted it to
for the past 7 years and they have the best wireless data of ANY
carrier in the nation.


On 2006-12-05 20:00:50 -0500, SMS <[email protected]> said:

> [email protected] wrote:
>> Cingular ranks low, and identical to JD Power rankings earlier this
>> year, SprintPCS ranks lower.
>>
>> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...lphones05.html
>
> It wasn't a customer service survey, it's their annual survey of carriers.
>
> While it's not surprising that Verizon ranked first in 14 out of 20
> areas, and second in the rest, I'm surprised that T-Mobile beat them in
> three cities. No doubt T-Mobile's policy of discouraging new sign-ups
> for people with no coverage at their home and work locations plays a
> part in their good ratings. Alltel has always been a good carrier in
> the cities that it serves, and it does well in roaming because it's
> CDMA.
>
> As I predicted, Verizon did decline in their ratings over last year. In
> last year's survey, Verizon was top-rated in 17 out of 18 metro areas,
> this year it's only 14 out of 20, with a tie in a 15th area.
>
> In some cities the differences are small, only one or two points
> difference, but in many the differences were significant, i.e. Alltel
> and Verizon were 14 points ahead of Cingular in Phoenix. Verizon
> continues to be the best carrier in the San Francisco Bay Area by a
> wide margin, with the three other carriers tied for 2nd through 4th,
> seven points behind Verizon. This result echoes the experiences of all
> the users I know personally, though some have chosen Cingular because
> they want to roam internationally with their U.S. number.
>
> It's pretty amusing that Consumer Reports joined the chorus in
> criticizing Cingular's "fewest dropped calls" ads, since it's
> demonstrably untrue, only Sprint had any cities with more dropped call
> than Cingular, with Verizon and T-Mobile having the fewest dropped
> calls.

---

› See More: Consumer Reports survey on Customer Service

whare are you and what plan and phone do you have iam trying sprint my self
and i get alot of conflicting info about sprint that makes makeing up my
mind to keep or change from sprint hard
thanks

--
AL'S COMPUTERS
"Der.Merovingian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:2006120623513975249-DerMero@NoSpamcom...
> I choose Sprint because it works for ME wherever i've ever wanted it to
> for the past 7 years and they have the best wireless data of ANY
> carrier in the nation.
>
>
> On 2006-12-05 20:00:50 -0500, SMS <[email protected]> said:
>
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >> Cingular ranks low, and identical to JD Power rankings earlier this
> >> year, SprintPCS ranks lower.
> >>
> >> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...lphones05.html
> >
> > It wasn't a customer service survey, it's their annual survey of
carriers.
> >
> > While it's not surprising that Verizon ranked first in 14 out of 20
> > areas, and second in the rest, I'm surprised that T-Mobile beat them in
> > three cities. No doubt T-Mobile's policy of discouraging new sign-ups
> > for people with no coverage at their home and work locations plays a
> > part in their good ratings. Alltel has always been a good carrier in
> > the cities that it serves, and it does well in roaming because it's
> > CDMA.
> >
> > As I predicted, Verizon did decline in their ratings over last year. In
> > last year's survey, Verizon was top-rated in 17 out of 18 metro areas,
> > this year it's only 14 out of 20, with a tie in a 15th area.
> >
> > In some cities the differences are small, only one or two points
> > difference, but in many the differences were significant, i.e. Alltel
> > and Verizon were 14 points ahead of Cingular in Phoenix. Verizon
> > continues to be the best carrier in the San Francisco Bay Area by a
> > wide margin, with the three other carriers tied for 2nd through 4th,
> > seven points behind Verizon. This result echoes the experiences of all
> > the users I know personally, though some have chosen Cingular because
> > they want to roam internationally with their U.S. number.
> >
> > It's pretty amusing that Consumer Reports joined the chorus in
> > criticizing Cingular's "fewest dropped calls" ads, since it's
> > demonstrably untrue, only Sprint had any cities with more dropped call
> > than Cingular, with Verizon and T-Mobile having the fewest dropped
> > calls.
>
>

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The big, really big, question is whether or not Sprint can pull all this
> off. The technical, financial, and business risks are truly huge. Thus
> far this is mostly vaporware, with Sprint mostly selling the Same Old
> Stuff (including iDEN). Only time will tell. But I wouldn't want to be
> a shareholder.
>
> On 5 Dec 2006 17:23:27 -0800, "[email protected]"
> <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>Sprint dedicated $7 billion to network enhancements in 2006.
>>Sprint is investing more than $2 billion into the Nextel National
>>Network and adding more than 1,600 new cell sites to expand
>>coverage and increase capacity across the country.
>>Sprint leads the industry in mobile broadband coverage and
>>rollout of EVDO and EVDO Rev A. By the fourth quarter of 2007,
>>Sprints entire mobile broadband network will be upgraded to
>>EV-DO Revision A. Once the network is upgraded, Sprint will
>>also expect to begin offering in early 2008 high performance
>>walkie-talkie services over the EV-DO Revision A network.
>>Don't forget 4G, Sprint's planned buildout of the 4G WiMAX
>>network will be the standard for future mobility products and services.
>>
>>The hallmark of Sprint Nextel is innovation.
>>Sprint's ranked #1 in the telecommunications industry in the
>>area of innovation in the FORTUNEs 2006 Most Admired Companies list.
>>Sprint Nextels impressive portfolio of assets includes a
>>high-speed data network, Sprint Power Vision, which empowers
>>customers to do what they want, when they want it, where
>>they want it. Sprint was the first carrier to offer live TV and
>>today we offer more than more than 50 video channels that
>>feature live and on-demand programming.
>>
>>Popular price plans are available to Sprint customers to help
>>prevent them from paying high overage charges
>>and paying for minutes they do not use. Nights start at 7 p.m., This
>>gives customers two more hours of free calling. Sprint also offers
>>plans with Free Incoming Calls - in which calls from any of the
>>networks are free. Another item other co's don't offer.
>>We Have Saved The Best for Last = Upgrade Fees Eliminated:
>>Sprint recently eliminated device upgrade fees for existing customers
>>when they purchase a new device either through telesales or
>>online at www.sprint.com
>>
>>---All Fact!!!
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

And after all you lecturing about the evils of top posting. Shame on you.

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 04:51:39 GMT, Der.Merovingian <[email protected]>
wrote in <2006120623513975249-DerMero@NoSpamcom>:

>I choose Sprint because it works for ME wherever i've ever wanted it to
>for the past 7 years

Good reason.

>and they have the best wireless data of ANY
>carrier in the nation.

For you. Not for me, and not for many others. There is no one best
carrier for all needs.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 18:17:59 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Robert Coe wrote:
>
>> I guess I read SMS's comments a little differently. I thought he was pointing
>> out that T-Mobile was being honest about their coverage areas and trying to
>> avoid selling their service to customers who were sure to be dissatisfied and
>> drag down their ratings. To me that's a sound business practice that all
>> carriers should emulate.
>
>Yes, that's what I intended. However I should also point out that out in
>the western region, T-Mobile is different than the old Voicestream that
>people back east are used to. Originally, T-Mobile did a swap with
>Cingular, where Cingular let T-Mobile use their 1900 MHz western
>network, and T-Mobile let Cingular use their 1900 MHz NY network.

Actually a joint venture.

>The
>1900 MHz GSM network out west was particularly bad (I had it for a
>year), and it still isn't the greatest.

Actually quite good.

>When Cingular took over AT&T
>Wireless, T-Mobile got the Cingular 1900 MHz network.

Actually a sale to T-Mobile by Cingular, with a purchase base of network
use by Cingular subscribers.

>Because Cingular,
>formerly Pacific Bell Wireless was so late to the party, they had too
>problems, first they couldn't put towers in all the prime locations that
>AT&T and Verizon had towers, and second they were stuck at the less
>desirable 1900 MHz, which is big disadvantage in terms of coverage.

Actually no real disadvantage.

>I think that one reason why T-Mobile did so well in the CR survey, at
>least in many regions, is that unlike Sprint and Cingular, who will sell
>service to anyone with a pulse, T-Mobile actually checks to see if the
>potential subscriber will have coverage, and if they don't, then they
>discourage the potential subscriber from signing up. This policy results
>in a lot fewer unhappy customers. With roaming on Cingular, in
>non-T-Mobile areas, T-Mobile has pretty good nationwide coverage.
>
>It's rather surprising how poorly Cingular fared, considering that their
>network is much larger than T-Mobile's. I'm most familiar with the San
>Francisco Bay Area, where Cingular has a lot less coverage than Verizon,
>especially in non-urban areas, but T-Mobile also has a lot less coverage
>than Verizon in the Bay Area, and was actually ranked the same as
>Cingular, and far below Verizon.

That T-Mobile did so well with less coverage than Cingular, given
network sharing agreements, actually shows the survey to be unreliable.

Cingular actually has the best coverage in the Bay Area. T-Mobile
isn't bad either. Sprint and Verizon are demonstrably worse in a number
of areas, including significant parts of the East Bay.

Take your Verizon advocacy to a more appropriate forum.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

BACKGROUND:

1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.

2. Studies of carriers, including those he purports to cite, actually
show small differences between carriers (not a "wide margin" as Steven
claims) that are often within the margin of error. For example, recent
JD Powers ratings of major carrier call quality ranged from only +/-2%
to only +/-5% in its six regions.

3. Results for Cingular and Sprint-Nextel are patently distorted by
combining dissimilar technologies and networks (e.g., TDMA/D-AMPS + old
GSM + new GSM; CDMA + iDEN). This is roughly like claiming the average
person has one breast.

4. CU surveys can't be validly generalized because they are a
self-selected sample of a non-representative universe (CR subscribers).
(Usenet of course has a similar problem.)

5. Results showing T-Mobile with better network performance than
Cingular in the West are patently nonsensical, given that Cingular uses
the same network as T-Mobile (the old Cingular "orange" network), plus
the extensive ATTWS ("blue" network).

6. Verizon doesn't have coverage in some of the areas Steven claims;
e.g., large sections of Skyline Blvd, and nearby sections of Page Mill
Road and Big Basin Way.

7. All carriers have coverage holes. There is no one best carrier in
all areas, as Steven claims. I've previously identified some areas
where Cingular coverage is better than Verizon coverage; e.g.,
waterfront parts of Corte Madera.

8. Steven's claim that 1900 MHz takes "4x to 5x" the number of towers as
compared to 800/850 MHz is patently absurd.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

In article <[email protected]>,
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.


can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
here or elsewhere?

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:19:04 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
>> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
>> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.
>
>can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
>here or elsewhere?

Search my prior posts with Google.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

In article <[email protected]>,
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:19:04 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
> <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>,
> > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
> >> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
> >> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.
> >
> >can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
> >here or elsewhere?
>
> Search my prior posts with Google.

i'll take that to mean you have none and that you made up your
allegation.

that was kind of clear, anyway.

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:25:29 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:19:04 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
>> <[email protected]> wrote in
>> <[email protected]>:
>>
>> >In article <[email protected]>,
>> > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
>> >> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
>> >> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.
>> >
>> >can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
>> >here or elsewhere?
>>
>> Search my prior posts with Google.
>
>i'll take that to mean you have none and that you made up your
>allegation.

You are of course free to take it however you want, no matter how
unfounded and silly. Even without Google, my prior post contained ample
evidence of misstatements by Steven that can be verified easily, as you
know.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

In article <[email protected]>,
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:25:29 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
> <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>,
> > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:19:04 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
> >> <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> <[email protected]>:
> >>
> >> >In article <[email protected]>,
> >> > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
> >> >> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
> >> >> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.
> >> >
> >> >can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
> >> >here or elsewhere?
> >>
> >> Search my prior posts with Google.
> >
> >i'll take that to mean you have none and that you made up your
> >allegation.
>
> You are of course free to take it however you want

even you must be aware on usenet that unsupported claims are
considered false claims.

i expect most readers took your claim as false from the beginning.

In alt.cellular.t-mobile james g. keegan jr. <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> even you must be aware on usenet that unsupported claims are
> considered false claims.
>

They are not considered false, they are considered unsupported.

> i expect most readers took your claim as false from the beginning.

I doubt that.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0

[email protected] (james g. keegan jr.) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> even you must be aware on usenet that unsupported claims are
> considered false claims.

Generally, they're simply considered unsupported, at least at first.

If the claimant refuses to support his assertions, that likely will
change.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | [email protected]

On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 19:47:06 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>
>> even you must be aware on usenet that unsupported claims are
>> considered false claims.
>
>Actually, whether statements are considered true or false has a lot to
>do with the reputation of who is posting them. If they are posted by
>someone with a history of lying and off-topic posting then they are
>often written off as false. This is the problem with Navas, I think that
>he may on occasion post something useful and correct, but the Usenet
>community now automatically discounts anything he writes because of his
>history. No one would think any worse of him if he admitted his errors
>and changed his ways.

'Those who have evidence will present their evidence,
whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.'

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> 'Those who have evidence will present their evidence,
> whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.'
>

You begin to stutter ... that must explain why you can't quit posting the
alt.cellular.cingular charter to the wrong newsgroup [alt.cellular.attws].

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0

I don't believe that there is anymore attws as it was purchased by Cingular.
Is that correct Tommy T?

"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> 'Those who have evidence will present their evidence,
>> whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.'
>>
>
> You begin to stutter ... that must explain why you can't quit posting the
> alt.cellular.cingular charter to the wrong newsgroup [alt.cellular.attws].
>
> --
> Thomas T. Veldhouse
> Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
>
>